Author: Mike Cline, T/X Resources
Do you ever need to use your SMT fault polygons for other applications? For example, I quite often convert them to an SMT culture layer, as a fault QC (quality control) tool, or use them in Surfer, when I need extended gridding capabilities.
The benefit of having an individual horizon’s fault polygons converted to an SMT culture layer is that you can easily keep the fault strikes consistent when working on an adjacent horizon, by overposting the culture layer onto your active horizon. I normally create fault planes on all of the faults that I see on multiple lines. However, some faults don’t extend far enough to be seen on more than one line, so it’s difficult to fault plane them with the lack of control points—a common occurrence in 2D projects, with widely-spaced lines (eg. regional projects).
Golden Software’s Surfer program has a wide array of gridding, and grid-manipulation capabilities, but it only uses the proprietary “bln” file format for faults. So, you will need to convert your SMT fault polygons to this format before you can use them in Surfer.
Author: Mike Cline, T/X Resources
Why bother using synthetic seismograms (aka. synthetics) to calibrate well info to our seismic data? Simple answer, TO REDUCE DRILLING RISK !
For example, I’ve seen prospects “evaporate” because the originator was mapping the wrong event—or just as bad, started mapping on the correct event, but ended up on the wrong event due to a character, or response change in the seismic data. This only became evident after a couple of synthetic correlations!
I also continue to see prospects that are being sold on the strength of an amplitude, or avo response, that is somehow related to a key wellbore. However, often a synthetic hasn’t been used to tie (correlate) the well to the seismic data. How could they even know for sure what was causing the anomaly, without a synthetic tie?
So, with these recent real-life examples in mind, I thought that it would be a good idea to cite some reasons why we should use synthetics, with a blog posting.
.
Author: Mike Cline, T/X Resources
How fortuitous! I received my version 8.2 update of SMT’s Kingdom software this afternoon, and just got it installed. One of the new features that has been added to this version of 2d/3dPAK, is the ability to display the Shaded Relief of a grid. So, I thought that this would be a good time to introduce the technique to those viewers not familiar with the general concept. However, since I haven’t had a chance to get completely familiar with this newest feature in the SMT software, the surface and map displays shown below were created in my normal work flow using Golden Software’s Surfer program. As time permits, I’ll try to review, and compare, SMT’s new feature.
What is a Shaded Relief display? It is a map view of an artificially illuminated 3D surface whereby shadows are cast by minor deflections in the surface (shadowed deflections are facing away from the illumination source). This type of map is an excellent way to highlight smaller faults which may not have been seen, or noticed, on the vertical seismic displays.
See the larger Adobe Reader pdf file.
Author: Mike Cline, T/X Resources
In this SMT VuPak 3D perspective display, only the largest 30% of the seismic troughs (negative amplitudes) have been selected. In conjunction with this amplitude extraction, the “Base of Channel” horizon, fault interpretation, along with the nearby wellbores have been selected for viewing. This results in an impressive cloud of large amplitudes, which exhibits a distinct, and channel-like sinuous character (red event, highlighted by yellow arrow), in close proximity with other controlling geologic features.
See the VuPak animation (18MB Media Player avi file), or see a larger Adobe Reader pdf file.
Note: The avi file is fairly large, so it will take some time before the animation starts.
Author: Mike Cline, T/X Resources
Since the first posting, I’ve gotten nothing but encouraging comments. Here are a few:
“Good work Mike.” (Michael M.)
“This is very interesting!” (David W.)
“Excellent idea.” (Teri B.)
“I think it’s a great idea.” (Sara V.)
“Works!” (Yvon H.)
“Wow! You did it.” (Mark C.)
“Thanks a lot for your blog, brilliant idea.” (Julien F.)
From the sound of it, visitors may be starting to realize the potential usefulness of the blog (at least I hope so), and how the old SMT User email forum might mesh with it. I also just checked my website stats, and the number of “hits” is up by orders of magnitude–so I know it has gotten some interest from viewers.
Author: Mike Cline, T/X Resources
As a standard practice, interpreting seismic faults is done on vertical seismic displays (VSD). However, this can be problematic, and very time consuming, in a complexly-faulted area. For a correct interpretation, the initial fault interpretation picks must be connected properly. An easier, quicker, and more accurate method than using VSD’s for this, is to interpret faults in the horizontal domain.
See the VuPak animation (29MB Media Player avi file), or see larger Adobe Reader pdf file.
Note: The avi file is fairly large, so it will take some time before the animation starts.